About

Accounts

You are at the newest post.Click here
to check if anything new just came in.

Impact Factor And The Future Of Medical Journals

Physicians are busy and it's difficult for them to be able to effectively analyze a paper for accuracy. The only real upside for the reviewer is the synthetic prestige that comes with being an anonymous reviewer, which may not be enough try what she says to muster a consistent and thorough effort. The flaws of the current system were exposed in a sting by a reporter for Science who had a fraudulent and comically bad paper, from a fake alias and institution, accepted in the vast majority of journals he had submitted to without any meaningful review. "The digital format opens space for debate that journals havent previously explored." In spite of their strong ties to tradition, journal editors are finally responding to the changing ecology. When I asked Howard Bauchner , editor-in-chief of the Journal of the American Medical Association, what the future of the medical journal was, he summed it up in just one word: description Digital. With a website curated with author video interviews, twitter feeds and podcasts, JAMA addresses one of the mediums biggest drawbackspassivity. Medical journals have traditionally been passive; readers read articles and experts go on to discuss them. The digital format opens space for debate that journals havent previously explored, Bauchner told me. Increasingly, journal editors are recommended reading also recognizing the limitation of the impact factor. More: http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/01/impact-factor-and-the-future-of-medical-journals/282763/